To be fair (although that’s an overused word), one would have to make sure the penalty is only reversed when the accuser can be demonstrated to have willfully made up the allegation.
What I mean is this: In any case, a “not guilty” should not automatically equate to “false accusation”. In a case such as the Duke Lacrosse team, the unraveling of the story by the actual evidence - which was complete and unequivocal - should be used as the catalyst for pursuit of “false accusation” penalties. In a he-said/she-said case, where the evidence is ambiguous and conviction or acquittal rests on the perception of honesty of those testifying, the false accusation card should be out of play (and must be CLEARLY so).
Just my $.02.
Agreed, for the most part. The problem I see of placing such a false-accusation boomerang effect “out of play” in cases of he-said/she-said is that it could then be misapplied to even cases where there is demonstrable proof of false-accusation... for example, one guy I knew in my national guard unit was going through a bit of a legal battle because of accusations by his wife of domestic violence... despite the dates in her sworn statement being dates he was deployed overseas (with the orders to prove it).
I don’t think anybody is suggesting that. The DA not making their case does not equate to a fabricated accusation.